Piano World Home Page Forums Fun Stuff! - Parties, Tours, Projects & More... Just For The Fun of It Snotty musicians who act like their genre is the only "real" music

I just want to clarify I'm not saying people can have no fun or joy at all from rap. I'm just saying it's not music. You know there are people who are masochist, don't you?

Well, I'll be the first to admit that rap isn't my cup of tea. By the same token, neither is most orchestral or classical. Diversity is the spice of life, though.

sure, I don't listen just to classicals, either. But what I listen to is always definetely music.

Music is organized sound.

Rap music is the current stop on a road made up of West African ritualistic shouts, African American spirituals and ringshouts, ragtime, jazz, R&B, be-bop, rock and roll (which at first differed from R&B only because of its marketing) and cool jazz. Historically speaking, music in Africa was VERY different from the music of Europe. The fusion of these two is what has become the style of popular music which most of the world listens to.

Rap music leans toward the influences of Africa, for obvious reasons. To say that rap isn't music is to say that African music, in general, is not music, because they share the same basic qualities which include syncopated rhythms, call and response, and audience participation (dancing along can be considered participation). The music of West Africa has come to affect almost everything that people in the world listen to, and that INCLUDES serious classical music. Gershwin, Ravel, Barber, Stravinsky (think 'ebony concerto'), and many other classical musicians have African influence in their music.

Sorry, but even if you don't like it, rap is most certainly music.

And Saint-Saens wrote the 'Africa' Fantasy--he was in Algiers for some time.

I agree with phonehome. And nice Paganini Rhapsody by the way, I didn't get around to posting in the other thread.

Thanks Kevin =o)

I do appreciate all kinds of music, so this was a perfect thread for me.

I concur with Frank here. The personal worth of music for me concerns joy, serendipity and surprise - the delight which it produces in my brain when I play or hear it. In the end nothing else matters very much except the sound and its effect on me. Style, fashion, tradition, social, historical and extra-musical associations and so on, even less its mode of creation - using or not using a particular set of rules. These things are certainly interesting at the intellectual level, and we can all have fun talking about them, but they do not seem to affect the immediate qualia of my musical experience. I do not really understand how this latter works and I suspect it is so deep I shall never fully do so.

Of course, the sounds which transport me will most likely not impress everybody else. Given the diversity of human personality it would be most surprising if they did. Nonetheless, if even a handful of people, musicians or not, take a fancy to my sounds then, while not strictly necessary, it undoubtedly adds a bonus to the process of creating music.

As far as genres are concerned, the older I get the broader my outlook is becoming.

So what music do you listen to namekuseijin?

I don't exactly like rap but I do believe it is a form of music. It is just a form of music based on rhythms and beats rather than melodies. Would you consider a drum solo music, or a drumming group, or some of the african or indian music, with untuned percussion instruments? What about that of the Australian aboriginal people?

Also some rap music does have variations in pitch, I would hardly call it a melody in most cases however there are definitely different pitches in there.

Attitude is part of music. Would any music still be as entertaining without any emotion at all?
However with out the flash videos(which I don't watch anyway), and the lyrics there isn't a lot I agree. There is still music in there be it bad or good, either way there is still rhythm, beat and a loop (even if it has been lifted from something else)

Jeanne W- loved the post and totally agree.

Are you saying that Pavarotti was less of a musician than .. oh say, Eric clapton? You know he couldn't read music right (I don't know if this is still the case.)

Hm, I never stated that the ability to read music well was in fact a measure of someone's musicianship, just that the difficulty of reading music is very high and requires a large amount of focused training in order to gain enough mental faculties to pull off. Silentkoala was talking difficulty in the first place.

Though the ability to read music well can boost your opportunities as a musician to extreme heights.

Though I'm not sure who you're referring to in your message, is it Clapton who can't read music or Pavarotti? I've always guessed that Pavarotti was a classically trained tenor, so I have a feeling he can read music and very well at that.

I wouldn't put money on that. I think he learned his music pretty much by rote.

Tell that to chance composers who want all but randomly disorganized sounds to be called music. :p

So, it seems it has come a full circle:

African ritualistic shouts -> African American spirituals and ringshouts -> ragtime -> jazz -> R&B -> be-bop (high point!) -> cool jazz -> rock and roll (descending) -> rap (shouts and ritualist drums).



So, it's wrong to say a son is ugly because his parents are beautiful, even though the brat is indeed ugly? Please, don't generalize: there are many good african descended music, which rap isn't.

The most distinctive feature of african music is its heavily syncopated rhythm and percussive nature. Problem is: rhythm is a feature not only of music, but also of poetry (literature), dance, cinema and many other "timeflowed" arts.

What makes music music is when there's at least melody lines involved, when there's pitch variation involved. So, African ritualist shouts and syncopated rhythms are no more music than a bunch of birds randomly calling their mates. Like any other primitive music efforts from all over the world, BTW.

It was only when African-Americans took ahold of centuries-old refined european musical instruments and common-practice harmonic rules, and then bent them to suit their expression needs that we had the germ of much of 20th century music.

If I'm sounding imperialist or colonialist, sorry, that's not what I mean. What I mean is that music improved from the fusion of old primitive african traditions and the then still relatively modern tonal practice that took europeans some 2 centuries to perfect.

And then, close to the end of the 20th century, the beginning of this one, we are going back once again: to shouts and hollow tree drums being beaten ragely.

I was referring to Pavarotti. It was a huge piece of news a few years back but washed over pretty quickly when people realised "hey, the guy can't read music but he's still AWESOME"

as for the ability to read, maybe it was just the way it came across... words written down don't always have the right tone:)

By the way, I bow out of this arguement/ conversation/ whatever you want to call it.... I find it useless when everyone here (including myself )is coming across with their own views but not getting anywhere in broadening anyone elses opinions. While there is a lot more to say on the subject it is getting very repetative.

Catch you in another discussion

It started as a plea for people of all genres to be sympathetic and accepting of other musician's genres. That isn't asking too much--but it won't happen all of the time to everyone's liking, so we learn to accept everyone for who they are and give them the space to be who they are. I always say, if you don't like something about someone or what they've said, it's not your problem, it's theirs. You can't change people nor their views--and should survey your own thoughts, likes and dislikes without bestowing them on everyone around you unless asked--and even then, with great discretion.

Sage advice, JBiegel.

Those who found this post of interest may want to check this post out:

http://www.pianoworld.com/ubb/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?/topic/2/14537.html#000000

"Tell that to chance composers who want all but randomly disorganized sounds to be called music."

I would still consider chance music to be organized in a sense.

This is something I think about a lot. Please do not take anything I write personally it is my view on music.

I adore classical music, I think it is the pinaccle of creativity and beauty. I respect those who perform classical music, teach it, practice it as a hobby, or simply listen to it.

I used to play guitar and got quite good at it (that's what people tell me, I'm not an arrogant person). As expected, I listened to a lot of rock and blues and jazz, listened to a lot of virtuosos and the like. They are very creative people with a really good understanding of music. (Steve Vai, Stevie Ray Vaughan, BB King, Albert Collins etc)

I won't discuss whether rap is music or not, but it does tax one's creativity. There was a time when I listened to Eminem's Marshall Mathers LP really much and I still do if I get in the mood. He is a creative person and uses his creative powers in what way he can express himself.

Each people likes certain kinds of music and that's fine. But as long as music is done for music's sake, not for money's, I respect the musician, though I may not like his music.

[/qb][/QUOTE]Tell that to chance composers who want all but randomly disorganized sounds to be called music. :p

It's still organized on a page, isn't it?